The present failure of the ACT courts and poorly-led DPP to do anything about criminals is truly astounding. A culture of over-promotion for inept mediocrities is coming home to roost.

From the granny-bashing ATM mugger who was allowed to escape a sentence on account of his promise to follow a rehabilitation course (a promise he had broken before) to the 17-year-old foreigner who bashed a Woollies Bottle-o staff member 99% to death and was given a suspended sentence by Dingwall who also expressed concern that the little vermin wouldn’t be deported, and to Mully, given bail over and over again only to continue his psychotic behaviour on the roads, which eventually killed another fellow-criminal who was brazenly breaking his bail and taking a car-load of stolen property to the Caravan park to his fence <– who is yet another criminal not in gaol and carrying on his criminal activities with little or no interference from the authorities.

But try and run a Hospital according to your moral principles and the entire Stanhope edifice of under-employed and under-achieving public-service bloat will come down on you. Although Stanhope failed on the Hospital, too.

You'd think they'd be doing something about the 3-year-old traffic jam at Glenloch created by Stanhope public servant criminal incompetence.

Could you possibly give me a name or link to these cases?
I’m doing a comparison essay on the law system in ACT on murder compared to other states in Australia, and these cases sound very helpful.

The present failure of the ACT courts and poorly-led DPP to do anything about criminals is truly astounding. A culture of over-promotion for inept mediocrities is coming home to roost.

From the granny-bashing ATM mugger who was allowed to escape a sentence on account of his promise to follow a rehabilitation course (a promise he had broken before) to the 17-year-old foreigner who bashed a Woollies Bottle-o staff member 99% to death and was given a suspended sentence by Dingwall who also expressed concern that the little vermin wouldn’t be deported, and to Mully, given bail over and over again only to continue his psychotic behaviour on the roads, which eventually killed another fellow-criminal who was brazenly breaking his bail and taking a car-load of stolen property to the Caravan park to his fence <– who is yet another criminal not in gaol and carrying on his criminal activities with little or no interference from the authorities.

But try and run a Hospital according to your moral principles and the entire Stanhope edifice of under-employed and under-achieving public-service bloat will come down on you. Although Stanhope failed on the Hospital, too.

You'd think they'd be doing something about the 3-year-old traffic jam at Glenloch created by Stanhope public servant criminal incompetence.

What about leaving the scene of an accident, I think he should have been charged for that, yes the courts do need looking into, it’s not the DPP or police, it must be frustrating for them to see someone get off scot free, after their hard work.

Definitely an interesting case. Would the result still have been acquittal if tried before a jury?
By lying on the road in dark clothing, how much did she contribute to the accident? Fifty percent? 80 Percent?
Was the fact that the delivery vehicle “missed’ her good luck or good management?
I reckon one thing is certain. If the driver was found guilty, then we would be here arguing about the sentence of 30 hours community service doled out by the judge…

sepi, I wasn’t saying they shouldn’t have pursued him for whatever was appropriate. What I’m saying is that if they go into court under-prepared, they lose, and waste money in the process. Now, even if he turns around and says to a SMH journalist that he was guilty, they can’t do him for manslaughter because of their incompetent half-baked previous attempt.

Do you know anything about the case, or just read the media reports and possibly the judgement ??

Besides, not stopping after an accident and not render assistance is illegal. It is also piss poor form, regardless if you “panic”.

sepi, I wasn’t saying they shouldn’t have pursued him for whatever was appropriate. What I’m saying is that if they go into court under-prepared, they lose, and waste money in the process. Now, even if he turns around and says to a SMH journalist that he was guilty, they can’t do him for manslaughter because of their incompetent half-baked previous attempt.

Going manslaughter with a backup of Culpable driving seemed very optimistic, especially when they effectively withdrew the manslaughter charge. Surely they could have had the culpable driving as the top charge backed by a neg driving, which the judge’s comments appear to show was his assessment.

Whatever his actions after the girl was hit, what he was being tried for was the hitting of the girl.
Given that she was almost hit by another vehicle shortly before, surely the prosecutors should have paused and thought “Maybe visibility was poor? And thus we’ve got a weakness in our case” rather than charged in convinced they were on a winner.
They’re wasting *our* money, and in the process possibly letting killers go.
But of course, the ramifications will be…… nothing.

Freak out – B/S!!! I hope that 99.9% of the community would stop and try and give assistance whether that be rendering first aid, ringing an ambulance or jumping up and down screaming and yelling out “HELP – I’ve run over someone!!!”

Ever paniced before?

Panicking indicates beyond all reasonable doubt (or any actual evidence) that one is a vicious murderer. This line of reasoning is, apparently, known as ‘common sense’.

I agree that a trial by stupid assumption would be hideously inappropriate – but how about a trial by Common Sense?

Doesn’t The Lord / Darwin handle those types of cases – though the penalties are pretty harsh in comparison.

The DPP are in between a rock and a hard place – if they bring cases to court that fail due to inadequate evidence, they get accused of wasting. If they don’t prosecute cases because they think the evidence is inadequate, they get accused of doing the job of the court. After all, isn’t the role of the court to decided if the accused has a case to answer?

Freak out – B/S!!! I hope that 99.9% of the community would stop and try and give assistance whether that be rendering first aid, ringing an ambulance or jumping up and down screaming and yelling out “HELP – I’ve run over someone!!!”

At some point, the prosecution officials are gunna have to start looking at the cases they bring to the court. By going to court with half-baked cases, whether they have merit or not, and losing, they’re simply wasting money.
And I am pretty sure I recall recent media reports of the DPP claiming they were under-resourced. Wasting time and dollars on cases they haven’t looked at critically is surely not helping their situation.

Jim Jones said “Thank the gods that we don’t have a system of ‘trial by stupid assumptions’ in the ACT.”

I agree that a trial by stupid assumption would be hideously inappropriate – but how about a trial by Common Sense?

And Inappropriate said “And as for the guy fleeing after the incident: well who wouldn’t freak out after running over their GF?”

Freak out – B/S!!! I hope that 99.9% of the community would stop and try and give assistance whether that be rendering first aid, ringing an ambulance or jumping up and down screaming and yelling out “HELP – I’ve run over someone!!!”

Amendments to give renters more rights have passed the Legislative Assembly. It will be easier for renters to keep a pet, make minor modifications to their rental property, and to break a lease without incurring significant costs https://t.co/UG9YEv9ilQ(8 hours ago)